Ralph Nader relates that Bush wont be impeached

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: palehorse74
I am I the only who tends to skip every single post by Harvey simply because of his stupid plug-n-play macro-generated phrases?

Neocon apologists like you continue to post the same lies, excuses, diversions and apologies for the Bushwhackos' crimes, time and again. I copy text from my previous replies because the facts and the truth don't change, either.

However, they're not "macros." If you read them, you'd find they're edited if and as necessary to respond to specific posts. They're often long, and they often contain supporting links. Why should I bother retyping them from scratch when I'm addressing the same neocon lies, again, and again, and again?

Is that the reaction you're going for Harvey? If not, then lose the annoying macros...

You're so hung up in your own dogma that I don't expect you to read my posts, let alone have half the intellect required to understand them. :laugh:

Anyways, Bush will never be impeached, but it ain't because of the martial-law craziness referred to in the OP.

Now, you're working overtime to prove you can't read. The main point of my first reply in this thread was that, contrary to the OP's title, Nader was NOT the one who raised the fear of your "martial law craziness."

I only wanted you to know that I'm sure a bunch of your posts get skipped due to the flood of BOLD CAPS and symbols. If you have any new info mixed in, it will get passed over every time... nobody wants to parse through the copy/pasted crap to find the new info buried in between.

Then, you continue to work on proving your functional illiteracy by asking for definitions of treason and murder that I'd already posted. Those definitions included reference to the number of American troops killed in Iraq because they are the the Bushwhackos' murder victims.

now you've got me confused with someone else...

FYI, as of 10/15/07 12:01 am EDT, the number of American troops killed in their war of LIES is 3,829, two more than my last post, yesterday.

🙁

How many Americans have to die for their lies to satisfy you bloodthirst? :shocked:

You really should read my posts if you want to challenge them on any factual basis... Or you can continue to prove you're just another Bushwhacko apologist, mouthing the words provided by Faux Noise and your lying neocon masters. :roll:

Once I got to the symbol and statistics nonsense, I skipped the rest of your response...

that's just how I roll.